FGHMovie.com HomePage. FGHMovieBlog: September 2007

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

VickWhoopi comment post

Someone posted this comment... and I can't see it when I click... so I am thinking no on else can either. Just wanted to post it.

Not sure what it means. Because if you watch the WHOLE View airing I recall her saying she condones it but Joy spoke over her.

And I have no idea what it means when you say she defended dogs who lost fights, have no idea what you are talking about.

Judy


Bailey has left a new comment on your post "Vick and all that Whoopie":

Whoopie may not have defended Vick in so many words, but technically she did condone his actions by such omission. On the other side of the coin, did she even once defend the dogs in Vick's possession who lost fights and were put to death because of that?



Posted by Bailey to FGHMovieBlog at 8:40 AM

Thursday, September 06, 2007

Vick and all that Whoopie

Dear Animal Rescuers...

Am I mistaken or have human beings always seen violence as entertainment?!?!?!

Whoopi did NOT defend Michael Vick. It is pretty clear the point she was making. Yesterday it was NOT as in-your-face clear as she made it today, yet yesterday it was still apparent that she was NOT defending Micheal Vick. Has everyone stopped listening? We are so used to soundbytes that the art of listening seems to fallen in the crapper.

All she did was say... hum... Vick comes from a place where dogfighting is the NORM..... (which is true). and HUMMMM we might need to take a look at that... hummmmmm.....

When you are raised seeing dogfighting as an OKAY THING to do... you grow up doing it... and thinking it is an okay thing to do... and maybe somewhere along the way you might GET IT. HOPEFULLY Vick now gets it... but who knows...

Merely describing WHY someone does something... does NOT in itself condone it! NOR does it excuse it...
explain and excuse are two completely different words...

LOOK at the Last Chance for Animals website on dogfighting... they describe how KIDS are at these dog fights. This desensitizes them to violence. Will these kids grow up thinking that dogfighting is wrong... ya think?!@?!?!?
http://www.lcanimal.org/cmpgn/cmpgn_007.htm

When you know better you do better... hopefully Vick now knows better. Hopefully he is not merely reading from a script. Look at the KKK those MF have a sick, warped, view of the world... could it be that ANYONE involved in dogfighting who thinks that dog fighting is OKAY, also has a sick, warped view of the world... ya think?!?!?

In India they let cows walk all over the place.. we don't do that... in China... well... they also hold animals with a VERY different regard... In California we have different laws than other states... do you know in many states there are laws that if your PET chases wildlife your pet can be SHOT.

In certain areas in America I would not be surprised if the LAW looked the other way on dogfighting because it is engrained in their society... That does not mean WE should look the other way... we need to shine the spotlight on that.. because this is America and we hold animals with a very special regard... with any luck.. Michael Vick is now getting that,...

THAT is what (in my opinion) Whoopi was pointing out...

it is just like spanking kids... when you grow up with that... you think it's okay until someone teaches you something different.. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TEACH!!! Do NOT spoil it with your
ignorance and anger... USE the power we now have...

Don't get pissy at Whoopi, THANK HER for mentioning it on a national show... When it is in the limelight we can educate... but this bashing makes ALL OF YOU ... Who are saying, she defended him, look like the irrational animal rescue people that the world already thinks you are... Animal Rescuers have just as bad... maybe WORSE image than Michael Vick and Senator Craig COMBINED it reinforces that image when you do REALLY IGNORANT things like this.

But come-on animal rescuers... grow up, get a grip on reality... and put the focus where it will do the most good.

Judy Crozier

www.freetoagoodhomemovie.com

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

No such thing as a "No Kill" Shelter

I ran across this today... someone has seen the rough cut of the film... or maybe this line is in the trailer, most likely the theatrical trailer... The full link is below.

THE WATCHDOG

One of the lines that caught our attention...

Posted By: AAS
Date: Friday, 6 April 2007, at 12:55 p.m.

In Response To: Free to a good home - the animal rescue movie *LINK* (Judy Crozier)

One of the lines from this film that caught our attention was the pound employee answering the confused young woman who said, "I thought you were no-kill", with the standard exoneration: "Even the ones that say no-kill, they just refuse to take in the animal and then it goes to a kill shelter."

The SPCA itself used to give this same answer when the media asked why the SPCA was still killing so many animals when other humane societies weren't.

The really interesting thing about that answer was that it was not only given in response to the growing interest in alternative groups, but in response to pounds that were doing a better job of animal welfare than the SPCA was!

We've never before actually heard the interesting term "kill shelter". A kill shelter is a logical impossibility, as you can't both shelter and kill, though a lack of logical intelligence is no surprise as no one has ever suggested that the people who kill animals for a living are terribly bright, at least not the ones at the bottom of the pound industry. The ones at the top, the management, and if it is a "humane" society, the members of the board of directors, can and do make the practical and rational decision to kill animals that Jim Miller defends in his post (below).

From today's Globe and Mail's "Social Studies": "We are unable to distinguish right from wrong," writes Roger Highfield in the Daily Telegraph, "if we rely on pure logic alone, according to a study that shows how morality is based on feelings."

Killing unwanted pets is practical as Mr Miller asserts - and it is logical too - but it is not right and it is not animal welfare.


http://animaladvocates.com/cgi-bin/newsroom.pl/noframes/read/15889